Phase Angle is Determined by Body Composition and Cardiorespiratory Fitness in Adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The phase angle is used to evaluate nutritional status and is an indicator of cellular health. Cardiorespiratory fitness and body composition are strong indicators of health during adolescence. We aimed to evaluate if body composition and cardiorespiratory fitness have an association with phase angle among adolescents. 203 girls and 220 boys (12.8±1.3 years) were evaluated. Peak height velocity, percentage fat mass, fat-free mass, cardiorespiratory fitness, and phase angle measurements were collected. Linear regression adjusted by peak height velocity was used to verify if predictor variables were associated with phase angle among adolescents. Phase angle showed correlation with fat-free mass (girls: r=0.42 and boys: r=0.37); with percent fat mass (girls: r=0.23); and with cardiorespiratory fitness (boys: r=0.19). Linear regression showed that percentage fat mass (in girls) and cardiorespiratory fitness (in boys) had an effect of 11 and 17% in phase angle, respectively, while fat-free mass had an effect of 22 and 26% in phase angle for girls and boys, respectively. Changes in phase angle seem to be more associated with the percentage fat mass in girls, cardiorespiratory fitness in boys, and fat-free mass in both when controlled by peak height velocity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".